🚀 go-pugleaf

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message 
news:rbadnWfSFt00TU7fRVn-jQ@comcast.com...
> "Harry Lavo" <hlavo@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:c_Gdnfsr8K9iUE7fRVn-rQ@comcast.com
>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
>> news:stWdnY-9sNadL07fRVn-qA@comcast.com...
>>> "ric" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message
>>> news:42D35A8B.C592E9B@home.com
>>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You can easily get one that is just as good new, for
> the
>>>>> price of the laser assembly.
>>>
>>>> A player as good as the XA7ES for $160 USD? Which one,
>>>> praytell?
>>>
>>> I have a Pioneer DV-563A which is I believe the
> predecessor
>>> of Stewart's Pioneer DV-575A which is approximated by the
>>> Pioneer DV-578A outside the UK.
>>>
>>> Harry Lavo recommended the DV-563 to RAHE readers, so how
>>> bad can it be?  Of course, later on Harry dis-recommended
> it
>>> for questioanble reasons, but consistency isn't one of
>>> Harry's primary traits.
>>>
>>> Sound and Vision gave the DV-563A a good review, and that
>>> appears to be about the time the golden ears turned
> against
>>> it.
>>>
>>>
> http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/1132003135639.pdf
>>>
>>
>> Actually, no, Arny.  I never owned or auditioned the 563a.
>
> But you did make a positive mention of it in a post, Harry.
> Thanks for showing the kind of slippery statements you will
> restor to in order to avoid admitting to a possible error.
>
>> But I did recommend the 578 immediately after it came out.
> I
>> think for it's price it is head and shoulders above it's
>> similarly priced competition in sound quality.
> Interesting
>> that the editors of The Perfect Vision just picked it for
>> their lowest priced recommended system as the one to buy
> "if
>> sound quality is your primary emphasis".
>
> As another poster mentioned, Perfect Vision also said nice
> things about the 563a in Mar./Apr. 2004.
>
> So now Harry, you say that the 578 is good because PV said
> nice things about it, but they said nice things about the
> 563 but  you are right to disagree with them?
>
>> However, it's value varies by format.  It is a very decent
> CD
>> player.  It is an exceptional DVD-A player at it's price
>> point.  And it is a mediocre SACD player.  It's main
>> shortcoming is that it doesn't reveal ambience the way
> better
>> players do.  In other words, it lacks the ultimate
>> transparency that better players have.
>
> Prove it.
>
>> And BTW Arny, I don't recall ever changing my opinion on
> this
>> in RAHE.
>
> So much for your memory, Harry.
>
>> I did however change my opinion on the cheapy
>> Panasonic I had previously brought to the group's
> attention.
>> And that was in part based on poor video performance.
> Perhaps
>> you are confusing the two.
>
> No Harry, your negative post about 563 said:
>
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.high-end/msg/0b453da09ffffb70
>
> "I *do* know that the 563 had control chip problems that led
> it to not being
> able to read the SACD layer on many UMG hybrid disks...so a
> lot of people
> who liked the sound gave them up because of the hassle.
> That is also why I
> never even tried it."
>
>> And for what it is worth, my recommendation to the group
>> pre-dated any written review of the 578.
>
> So Harry this is an attempt on your part to steer attention
> away from your mistakes w/r/t the 563?
>
> This just shows that you were speaking out on a topic you
> actually knew nothing at all about.
>
>>  I bought it when
>> shopping for a good DVD-A player, and decided that there
>> wasn't enought sound difference given the uncertainty
> about
>> DVD-A's future to justify the Arcam DV79, which is a
> superb
>> DVD-A machine.  I bought it based on my ears.
>
> The fallacy your perceptions and thoughts are already well
> known, Harry.  Ditto for your brain, given how you just
> scrambled facts like the dynamic range of SACD versus DVD-A,
> and your prior recommendations and comments.
>

Arny, the 563 and 578 players are different players.  Any comments I made on 
the 563 were simply references to their general acceptance in the audiophile 
community, as your post above simply reiterates.  I presume that if you 
could find me recommending the 563 based on my own experience you would have 
done so.  I did nothing but give "factual" information about that unit based 
on its reputation.

When I was shopping, the 563 had just been replaced by the 578.  I had 
several modifiers inform me that the 578 was "inferior" to the 563.  So I 
didn't listen to them, since I suspected that this opinion may have been 
based on a) the ease of modifying, or b) the need for modifying.  Instead I 
listened to the unit myself in several places and then in my own system, as 
well as listening to several other players with DVD-A capability.  That is 
the unit I recommended, based on my own listening.

No amount of tap-dancing about on your part above can change these facts 
Arny.  Your memory was faulty, and I simply pointed it out.  No big deal, 
except perhaps to somebody with a poor ego.